Georgia Prosecutor Conduct Rules and the Dishonest Duo

[Update, 8:30 p.m.]: Each day I follow this joke of a trial, I tell myself that Arnt, Gregor and House cannot sink any lower, yet today with the barring of some testimony from expert witness Dr. Ann Hazzard, a well-known clinical psychologist, House demonstrated beyond a doubt that he actually believes that he is supposed to have one set of rules for the defendants, and, to be honest, NO rules for the prosecutors.

The Hazzard affair was especially egregious. Even though Georgia law did not require the defense to prepare a summary of Dr. Hazzard's testimony, the defense did it anyway. However, Gregor told the court that the prosecution never received the documents, which was a bald-faced lie, so he demanded that she be totally disqualified from testifying. (You might recall that two nights ago, I predicted that the Dishonest Duo would try to pull this kind of trick, and I was right.)

Unfortunately, it gets worse, and you can read how Gregor and Arnt sent a SWAT team to Dr. Hazzard's office in Atlanta, which trashed her office and brutalized her and her clients. All in a day's work I guess. (The Chattanoogan article by Dennis Norwood also does a great job in laying out the testimony that Dr. Hazzard WAS permitted to give.)

And, it gets even better (or worse, depending on your viewpoint). While "House of Horrors" did not altogether disqualify her testimony, he DID rule that she COULD NOT tell the jury anything about her interview with the children of Tonya Craft, because the prosecutors did not want Dr. Hazzard to say what she had concluded: She saw NO signs of sexual abuse with either of them.

House's reasoning? Such testimony, he declared, would be hearsay. Now, this is rich, very rich. Almost ALL of the "expert" witness testimony for the prosecution has been hearsay, and House has allowed ALL of it to be entered into the record. Furthermore, there is a long record of testimony such as Dr. Hazzard was prepared to give being used in other courts, including in Georgia, but such testimony might have undermined the lies that the Dishonest Duo are trying to foist upon the jury, and, as we have seen time and again, House will allow NOTHING to get in the way of rigging a conviction.

This most likely was the most shameful moment in a very shameful trial. Furthermore, even someone like House, who observers to a person tell me that takes ALL of his instructions from Gregor and Arnt, must know that this trial is a train wreck, and that even if Ms. Craft is convicted, the guilty verdict certainly will be overturned. Moreover, no matter what happens, Brian House will be defined by this trial, and he never again will have an ounce of credibility as a judge.

As for Arnt and Gregor, I am announcing that I will be working for their disbarment. As the earlier post below demonstrates, their conduct over the past three weeks has demonstrated that they should not be entrusted with charging anyone with a crime, and it is obvious that they have obliterated the rules that are supposed to govern them.

I need to make it very clear: I am going to make it my mission in life to have these men disciplined and have their Georgia law licenses taken away. I may not succeed, but Christopher Arnt and Len Gregor are going to know that they are in a fight for their careers. They made the decision to trash the law and their profession, and now they are going to live with the consequences. [End Update]

As I survey the wreckage of the Tonya Craft trial, what with Judge Brian "House of Horrors" along with the Dishonest Duo of Facebook and The Man running the proceedings, it is time to step back and examine the conduct that so many of you have observed personally while sitting in that alleged courtroom. Today, I looked through the rules that prosecutors in Georgia are supposed to follow, and -- Surprise! -- the Dishonest Duo clearly believes that the rules exist for them to break.

I will list each rule and its contents, and then you, dear reader, are free to make your own judgments. Those who actually have entered the House of Horrors and seen the proceedings for yourself might be the most authoritative in interpreting the rules and the actions of the Dishonest Duo.

Rule 3.3:

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal;

(2) fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client;

(4) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures.

4(d) In an ex parte proceeding, other than grand jury proceedings, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer that the lawyer reasonably believes are necessary to enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse.

The maximum penalty for a violation of this Rule is disbarment.

Rule 3.4:

A lawyer shall not:

(a) unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to do any such act;

(b) (1) falsify evidence;

(2) counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely;

The maximum penalty for a violation of this Rule is disbarment.

Rule 3.5:

A lawyer shall not, without regard to whether the lawyer represents a client in the matter:

(a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror or other official by means prohibited by law;

(b) communicate ex parte with such a person except as permitted by law; or

(c) engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal.

The maximum penalty for a violation of part (a) of this Rule is disbarment. The maximum penalty for a violation of part (b) or part (c) of this Rule is a public reprimand.

I have covered Rules 3.6 and Rules 3.8 here, and Chris Arnt's Facebook page and his public comments about Tonya Craft's "guilt" are prima facae evidence of his having violated those two rules, which carry a maximum penalty of public reprimand.

The more serious alleged violations come in the breaking of Rules 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5. I believe that both Arnt and Gregor have suborned perjury, and then they covered it up when they prevented the defense from entering the on-line resume of Sandra Lamb's child after Lamb testified that the girl had not received acting lessons.

Furthermore, as I have said many times, the testimony of both Suzi Thorne and Tim Deal clearly was perjured. (Yeah, investigators after hitting the "mother lode" of "disclosures" "just forget" to memorialize the moment. Right.)

Then there is the issue about their "Animal House" behavior in the courtroom. A number of people who have attended have contacted me and told me their observations. Unlike the "testimony" created by the prosecution, these accusations really are consistent. Here are some accounts:

I sat in court yesterday afternoon and this morning. I am completely amazed at how Judge House, the prosecutors, and Det. Deal act in court. I saw on many occasions the Judge making faces at "The Man and Facebook." He seems to be getting all of his cues from them. I also witnessed today, Det. Deal roll his eyes at people in the audience(seated behind the prosecution) as the Defense was fighting to get in Dr. Hazzards testimony. During this time, House also reprimanded Dr. Lorendos(sp??) for raising his voice. Yet, when "The Man" slammed a document down accusing the defense of showboating in front of the jury, no action or reprimand from the judge(no big surprise). It is so very evident(especially as you seat in the court room) that House is aligned with these two and they will stop at nothing to get a conviction!! One other interesting observation. The person that I was with also noticed that the baliffs stare down the defense side of the audience. It is as if they are looking for a reason to throw you out!!

And this:

Gregor and Aren't (my own joke) honestly acted like children -- if they were my son I'd have gone up and pulled him up by his ears and told him to stop acting like an idiot. As the defense questioned a Mr. Walker on the stand, the two of them couldn't sit still. On purpose, of course, they acted like 12 year olds -- they'd put their heads in their hands and shake them, they'd put their arms behind their heads and sigh -- they were like baby monkeys!

And then this:

I was in court today and was able to see this mockery of a trial for myself...I am appalled! No need for a judge because the DA is definitely running the show. Honestly, the judge looks at them everytime just before he overrules the defense team! What are they so afraid of...the defense wants to hear the opinion of a real expert...with credentials...and they continuously object. Mr. Deal was seen rolling his eyes to the prosecutions supporters...the DA Slamming a paper down in front of defense attorney...and House just sits there. He actually looks annoyed to even be there. Nothing but praise for the defense team...they never let this outlandish behavior rattle them.

While it is true that Brian House is supposed to be in charge, nonetheless Arnt and Gregor are fully aware of the rules of conduct for their office. That they consider those rules to be beneath them is not an excuse for their behavior and their bullying.

Important: Some of you who have attended these proceedings and witnessed this misconduct can take out sworn statements and have them notarized. I can get more information about this. The reason I am asking is that I plan to present the Georgia State Bar with this evidence of misconduct. Obviously, that would place you in a position of possibly having to testify against a prosecutor, should the Bar take these complaints seriously.

I can understand why some people might not want to become involved, especially given the ordeal you have faced at the courthouse already. Nonetheless, people who are interested in having sworn statements made can email me.